Enron Fraud: Effects of the Scam on the Stakeholder - Case Study Example

 Enron Fraud: Effects of the Scam on the Stakeholder Summary The Enron scandal has been one of the most dis – respectful examples of the accounting manipulation and misrepresentation of the financial statements in the recent past among the corporate history. The scam not only indicated the inadequate accounting and auditing policies of the company but also the corporate mis - governance and the failure of the external audit. Though by the end of the 2001, the company was bankrupted but even at the starting of the year also, the share price was $ 90, which had become 70 cents at the end of the year after bankruptcy. In fact, the company was considered as the fastest growing company in the United States of America as it had reported 311% increase in the share price within 10 years. Management was held responsible for this. The entire set of stakeholder had to suffer and face a huge amount of loss because of the negligence of their representatives that is the board of directors. Therefore, through this paper it has been tried to indicate the faulty authorities and the badly affected stakeholders. The investors were not able to find out any indication from the annual report or the financial statements of the company as it was manipulated but when it had been restated there were many such indications through which they can easily understand the declining trend of the company. Through this paper, the researcher tries to present comparative data of four years for better understanding the misrepresentation of the data. All this data had been followed by the various issues which plays significant roles while evaluating the statements. Introduction A well known and powerful company which has renowned for its innovative business model and had been levelled as the most admired company by the world’s most famous magazine. Fortune, fell in a span of less than two months and become bankrupted. It is not a story but fact, which was true with the so-thought American giant, Enron. It is a remarkable event in the America’s corporate history. The negligible role of the board of directors and manipulative activities of the managers led to such bankruptcy. Management of the company also forced the audit company, Arthur Andersen, to ignore all such misrepresentation of the accounts created by the company. Continuous manipulation and the support of the auditor firms, change the idol image of the company to the congressional doormat. It was on October 16, 2001, that Enron Corporation announced it was planning to reduce the amount of the after tax net income by $544 million which was followed by the decline of the shareholder’s equity by $1.2 billion and all this happened because of the accounting errors. On November 8, they further announced that the net incomes for the previous four years (1997-2000) were restated because of the same reason. The equity had been lowered by one month and finally on December 2, 2001 the company was filed for the bankruptcy. Instead of having a wide spread network of the regulatory bodies and audit committees, the company had drawn its deadline within the 16 years of its incorporation, where their audit committee was consisting of experts such as Wendy Gramm (the former Chair Person of US Commodity Futures Trading Commission); John Mendelsohn (President of the University of Texas) and Paulo Pereira (former President and CEO of the State Bank of Rio de Janeiro). The primary objective of this study is to determine the loopholes of the financial statements which were supposed to be identified by the investors. Instead of directly jumping in the analytical part of the financial statement, the paper also provides information about the company and the background of the scam. Behind any scam there are various issues which ultimately pave the path towards the scam or bankruptcy of any company. Same is applicable for this company also. Therefore, the paper will focus on all those issues which ultimately help the researcher to determine the misrepresentation before the scam and the effect on the stakeholders after the scam. This paper will aims to show one how a financial statement can be properly evaluated. Most of the facts will be supported by the calculation of the comparative ratios and thus a clear picture of the past records of Enron can be easily understood by the readers. Background of the Company In the year of 1985, Kenneth Lay had founded Enron by virtue of merger of two gas pipeline companies namely Houston Natural Gas and Intermonth. 37,000 miles of intra – state and inter - state pipelines had been owned by this company for transporting natural gas. Before 1985, the contracts were held between the gas producers and the pipelines as the “take-or-pay” contracts. As the United States Congress passed legislation regarding the deregulating of the sale of natural gas, in the beginning of the 1990s, Kenneth initiated the selling of electricity at the market price. The resulting market enabled Enron to sell energy by allowing them to thrive. When the producers and the local governments started criticising the price volatility and demanded for increased regulation, then because of having a strong base the Enron and others were able to maintain free market system in place. By 1992, Enron become the largest trader of natural gas in entire North America. The earnings before interest and taxes of the gas trading business was $122 million in 1992 and this huge amount made the business second largest contributor to Enron’s net income. In November 1992, Enron started taking initiative to build up an online trading model, named ‘EnronOnline’. This innovative initiative took the company two steps ahead to develop its abilities to manage its trading business. Enron pursued a diversification strategy to attain further growth. It carried out international projects related to management and construction of energy facilities. By 2001, Enron become a big multi - national company and not only possessed and operated gas pipelines, broad band assets, water plants, electricity plants and pulp and paper plants but also entered into the financial market for trading the similar type of products and services. It reflected in the price of the stock price which was raised by 311% from 1990 to the end of 1998 and was even higher than the growth of the Standard’s and Poor’s 500 index growth. Even after 1998 also the stock price rose significantly. In 1999, it increased by 56% and 87% where as in 2000, the Standard & Poor 500 index depicted a 20% increase and 10% decline respectively. At the end of the calendar year 2000, a drastic change had been noticed in the financial performance of the company. Its market capitalisation was over $ 60 billion and its earnings and book value became 70 times and 6 times higher respectively. It led to a higher expectation of Enron’s future prospects in the stock market. According to the ‘Most Admired Companies survey’ conducted by ‘Fortune’, Enron was rated the ‘most innovative large company’ in the entire America. Origin of the Scam In October 2001, the Enron scam had been revealed. This scandal led to the bankruptcy of the Enron Corporation. It also included the dissolution of the Arthur Andersen which had been considered as the world’s one of the five largest accounting and audit partnerships. This case was the instance of the biggest audit failure along with the largest bankruptcy in the American corporate history. Jeffrey Skilling was hired after several years of the foundation. He had build up a team of executives. The team was able to conceal debt from the failed projects and dealt through the adaption of accounting loopholes, poor financial reporting and special purpose entities. Andrew Fastow, the Chief Financial Officer of the company along with the other executives was capable to mislead the board of directors and the audit committee of the Enron Corporation. Even they also pressurise the audit firm to ignore the issue. Enron was capable of building up a huge fund for a questionable business model in spite of the elaborate corporate governance network. In the middle of the year 2000, Enron’s stock price became too high and hit US$ 90 per share. At the end of the November, 2001 the share price became too less which led to a loss of $11 billion for the shareholders. Soon after that the U.S. Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) had started investigation. Enron filed for bankruptcy on December 2, 2001 when the deal with Dynegy failed. Under Chapter 11 of the ‘United States Bankruptcy Code’, the company had filed for bankruptcy. It has been recognised as the world’s largest bankruptcy with $ 63.4 billion assets until the WorldCom’s 2002 bankruptcy. Apart from the audit failure, it can also be considered as a case of potential weakness of U.S. Capital Market System as the capital market only develops an appropriate linkage between the investors and the managers regarding the incentive, governance and information. This process should accomplish through an association of intermediaries such as information analyzers and ratings agencies, professional investors, assurance professionals and internal governance agents. These parties are further regulated by various institutions like Security and Exchange Commission, Financial Accounting Standards Board, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and Stock Exchanges (Healy, & Et. Al, 2003). Effects of the Scam on the Stakeholder In spite of losing billions in the pensions and stock price, the employees and the shareholders of the company received a limited return. In the United States District Court, the auditor firm of Enron Corporation, Arthur Andersen, was found guilty and started losing its customer which ultimately led to the firm’s closure. Most of the executives related with scam were imprisoned. U.S. government had taken corrective action in this regards and enacted various regulations and legislations to ensure the reliability of the financial reporting process for the public companies. One of that legislation has been the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which improved the accountability of the auditing firm to remain independent of their clients. It also takes strict action for altering, destroying records in the federal investigations or for trying to defraud shareholders. Various Issues related to Enron Until the end of the 2001 or up to the declaration of bankruptcy, the company was known as the fastest growing and most innovative corporations all across the world. As per the annual statements of the Enron, the annual revenue had increased by 100 billion within 10 years. Later it has been analysed that the root of the problem or this scandal is not only depended upon its core business i.e. the energy operation. The problem actually erupted from the “Dot Com” investment in the internet and in the communication business. The various issues related with this scam can be explained as follows: Accounting Issues The Enron controversy involves various accounting issues. One of the prime issues has been that the company had used derivatives for manipulating the accounting results. There is scope of improved disclosure regarding the financial arrangements related to the contingent liabilities. It could have taken place either in notes in the financial statement or in the management discussion. Another important issue was that if the financial statement of a corporation should consolidate the financial statement of a ‘Special Purpose Entities’ or not. Here, it is important to state that the financial statements of any companies that sell securities to the public should be prepared by the Accounting Standard Board which has been set by the Financial Accounting Standard Board and Security Exchange Commission. Pension Issues A retirement plan had been sponsored by Enron. It was named “401(K)”. In this pension plan, the employees are allowed to contribute a part of their salary on a tax-differed basis. “401(K)” plan has been considered under the Internal Revenue Code which was included by the Revenue Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-600). As per the status of this retire plan at the end of 2000, 62% of the assets of this plan consisted of Enron stock. It has been discussed earlier that there was a huge crash in the stock price at the end of 2001.The share price was $80/per share in January, 2001 was worth less than 70 cents in January, 2002. Therefore it is clear that due to the bankruptcy the value of the pension plan of the employees became very low. There is a controversy for this plan regarding the laws and the regulations that administers this plan. Pension analysts had raised question regarding the holding of stock in such pension plan (Purcell & Et. Al, 2002). Corporate Governance Issues The board of directors plays an important role in an organisation as they are responsible to supervise the corporate management to guard the interest of the shareholders. It has been found that the board of directors in Enron were not at all active in this regard. The chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow was involved in creating private partnerships with the firm to do business. The management was able to hide the losses and debts through the transactions involving in this partnership which had a considerable impact on the Enron’s reported profit. This partnership issue had been completely ignored by the board of directors of the company. Securities Analyst Issues The security analyst has been employed by investment banks or any other organisation for conducting research and to provide recommendation to the sales staff and the clients of the company regarding the ‘sell’, ‘buy’ or ‘hold’ decision. The tasks of security analyst are very risky and many of the investors had been relied upon their opinion and take decision according to them. Their support is also very crucial for Enron as they need constant sources of the funding from the financial market. Only two major firm analysts out of 11 major firms had rated the stock of this company as ‘sell’ before Enron’s stock price had declined by 99% from its high, on November 29, 2001, it raised various questions regarding the accountability of the security analysts and whether regulations are needed for the analyst’s personal holdings or to their employer dealing process. Banking Issues Banking institutions plays a vital role for an organisation. Same is applicable for Enron also. Many prominent banking companies have been involved with the investment banking and the commercial banking businesses with the Enron. Citigroup and J.P. Morgan Chase are the two major companies that were related to this company and had suffered from Enron’s collapse. Few issues had also arisen regarding the performance of those banks whether the bankers tried to attract or pressurize other parties to provide funding for Enron or to recommend its securities and derivatives to. Conflicts of interest of these financial companies may also take place between the avoiding of risk of loan from the bankers’ side and opportunity of gaining profits from the investment banker’s side. Another issue had been if the Dynegy Rescue Plan devise late in Enron's collapse through the involvement of further investments of Citigroup and J.P. Morgan or not. Questions regarding accounting process also had prompted if the accounting process adopted by Enron for banks' off-balance-sheet items were proper or not (Jickling, n.d.). Derivatives Issues Issues related with derivatives are basically related with the core business of Enron which was energy business. Enron used to sell energy at a fixed price and with a long term contract. These long term contract was beneficial for the buyer as they were able to minimise risks but the market in which he company was traded was unregulated and had no reporting mechanism. Therefore, a very little information had been available regarding the profitability comes from the derivative activities of this company apart from the information consolidated in the company’s own financial statements. Thus, the scam highlights the necessity of supervision of the unregulated derivative markets (National Council for Science and the Environment, 2000). Auditing Issues As per the law of the federal securities, the financial and the accounting statement of any publicly traded corporation should be certified by an independent auditor. In case of Enron, the auditor firm Arthur Andersen had been accused on charges related to criminal hindrance of justice with respect to the demolition of accounting documents. This was completely unethical activity for the auditing firm (Shorter, G, 2002). Analysis of Financial Statement Analysing a financial statement required more focus on the each small factor. It does not mean or indicate only analysing the financial ratio. Therefore for analysing a financial statement need to cover the following points: Business Strategy Analysis: It refers to the proper description of the economic environment and the business strategy of an organisation. Accounting Analysis: It indicates the evaluation of the accounting policy thoroughly to understand the scope of misrepresentation of accounting process and various other accounting issues and make necessary adjustment according to that. Financial Analysis: It basically focuses on the interpretation of various financial ratios and cash flow statements to understand the financial status of the company. Prospective Analysis: This basically refers to the forecasting of the future performance and thus predicts the probability of bankruptcy and the credit worthiness of the company (David Eccles School of Business, 2005). Now to evaluate the financial statements of Enron Corporation and to find out the points which provide indication of such bankruptcy, it needs thorough analysis of their statements through the above mentioned factors. Business Strategy Analysis Few business strategies which were involved that led to this scam can be described out here. The most important one had been to engage in partnership with the major contributors of the firm. This can be considered as the most vital decision which had a greater importance behind the bankruptcy. Even one of the company’s internal strategies was the pension plan, where the contribution of the employer was through the stock option. It leads to lose of billions of dollar to the employer. Another one doubtful strategy while preparing the annual report was the inclusion of the transaction of SPEs. Accounting Analysis The core accounting issue of the company was known as “Snow Ball”. It indicates the involvement of the company in the recording of the cost of cancelled projects. The logic behind it was that no official letters had been approved on those projects as the rejected one. Initially, it has been dictated that the amount of snow ball will be under $ 90 million which was extended to $ 200 million later. Basically few accounting and auditing issues can be referred that has been used by Enron for manipulating the reports. Some of them are as follows: They did not use an adequate discloser for ‘Related Party Transactions’ and conflict of interest and their cost of shareholders. Accounting process for stock was not proper SPE had not been consolidated in the accounting policy which leads to conceal the losses and debts from its investors. Enron used to consider the fees for service rendered and revenue from the selling of forward contracts as the current income, which were therefore in effect of disguised loans In the annual report for the year 1999 and 2000, filled up in the form 10-K with the Security Exchange Commission, Enron had stated that the merchant investments and the energy assets had been recorded in the fair value. This valuation was based on market values of the publicly traded securities and cash flow analysis and independent appraisal. Little information has been provided here regarding the ‘Pre-tax gains from sales of merchant assets and revaluations of investments’, ‘Total pre-tax net income’ of Enron, and the increase in the percentage of the total net income. Table 1 Year Millions $ Percentage increase in reported Net Income (%) Pre-tax gains from sales and revaluations Pre-tax reported Net Income 2000 104 979 10.6 1999 756 893 84.7 1998 628 703 89.3 1997 136 105 129.5 ( Benston, & Hartgraves, n.d.). Apart from that there was strong impact on the debt-equity ratio after the consolidation of Enron’s off-balance sheet equity investments. Prior to consolidation, the ratio were 4.4 whereas after the consolidation it became 6.2. The loan guarantee of the unconsolidated entities had increased the off - balance sheet loan. Another important issue was that an entity which had 40% contribution in the pre-tax income in the year of 2000, had been controlled by the CFO of the company. Financial Analysis Enron had presented a consolidated financial statement combined with the subsidiaries and partnerships, which is indeed very complicated. Much of the information which had been presented to the investors, did not include those debts for which the company was actually responsible and include all such assets and revenues which had not been earned. Therefore, the financial ratios were become and financial position or status of the company appeared sound than it actually was. For better understanding, two tables have been prepared to show the profitability and the leverage ratios of the company for the starting from 1996 to 2000 in the two below tables. The Table 2 represents the ratios which have been calculated through the actual financial statement that had been submitted where Table 3 is the screening of the ratios of the financial statement which had been restated. After the restatement all three profitability ratio have been declined which is very much expected and the leverage ratios have been risen. For the purpose, the year of 1996 has been taken as the starting points. Table 2 Partial Analysis of the Financial Statement for 5 years before restatement Ratios 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Net Profit Margin 4.395% 0.518% 2.249% 2.263% 0.971% Return on Assets 3.619% 0.466% 2.395% 2.675% 1.495% Return on Equity 22.583% 1.915% 10.165% 10.581% 9.463% Debt Ratio 76.929% 75.089% 75.986% 71.331% 82.489% Debt Equity 0.89954 1.11321 1.04384 0.74723 0.74542 (Clayton, R, J, 2002). Table 3 Partial Analysis of the Financial Statement for 5 years after restatement Ratios 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Net Profit Margin 4.395% 0.379% 1.823% 1.608% 0.873% Return on Assets 3.619% 0.341% 1.942% 1.932% 1.343% Return on Equity 22.583% 1.404% 8.242% 7.642% 8.506% Debt Ratio 76.929% 78.241% 77.898% 73.383% 83.448% Debt Equity 0.89954 1.29944 1.18942 0.88442 0.85648 (Clayton, R, J, 2002). It is pretty clear from the above table that there is a drastic change in the profitability ratio of the company before and after the restatement. Prior to 1996, the financial status of the company was stable but just after 1996 and specifically in the year of 1997, the profitability ratios had fallen dramatically. From the year of 1998, though it started to increase but still was not able to reach the ratio that was prevalent in 1996. The restated financial statement showed more critical condition. From the year of 1996 to 1997, the net profit margin had declined from 4.4% to 0.5% which was more than 88% difference. Return on Assets of the firm showed a similar picture whereas Return on Equity was declined by more than 92%. All these changes have been exhibited in the financial statements before its restatement. The status is found to be more critical if the restated financial statement would have been used. Net profit margin was declined by 91% from 1996 to 1997 where another two profitability ratios had exhibited a fall of almost 94 %. After 1997, approximately 50% increment has been noticed but the financial position did not become stable as prior to the 1996. With respect to the leverage ratios, it can be said that the debt equity ratio had been raised by 23%, as per the data of prior to restatement and 44% after the restatement. 21% change could be noticed here. Debt Ratio exhibited a change of around 6% from the 1996 to 2000, where after restatement the ratio has been changed by another 2%. From the above discussion, it has been cleared that in 1997 there was a historical change. As per the history of the company concerned it was in 1997 that Enron formed Chewco, LLP and JEDI II. Even Enron had announced financial restatement from the year 1997 to 2000, due to the accounting errors in the transaction with the LJM2 and other related parties. The concerned quarters later suggested that the balance sheet of Enron had “smelled” of their bankruptcy for quite a few years. Earnings were positive through the 14 quarters but out of that only in the three quarters cash flows were positive. With the help of the SPREDGAR software cash flows of Enron had been prepared for quarter starting from June, 1997 to September, 2000. This cash flow had been prepared through comparing successive balance sheets. Thus, it would also determine that from where the money came and where it had went. Through a chart, a comparative analysis of the earnings and the leveraged and unleveraged cash flows during those quarters can be presented: (Valustox, 2003). This chart shows that there was something wrong as on June, ‘97 all the earnings showed positive figure but the cash flows were negative. It can be possible for one or two quarters but throughout the continuous four years, it seemed to be impossible. Here, the third quarter of the year of 1997 shows the maximum negative cash flow. Therefore, this cash flow can be thoroughly analysed for determining the questionable accounting practices and any financial manipulation through the “red flags”. (Valustox, 2003). Analysing these cash flows, the net income of this company has been indicated through the green cell which was $ 134 billion. This net income had been generated through the operating activity (yellow cell), investment activity (blue cell) and financing activity (purple cell). On the left side of the chart, the calculation of the leveraged and unleveraged cash flow has been shown. This chart indicates certain things to be majorly wrong as a huge amount of stocks and bonds have been used to finance certain investments and along with that few of the properties. Another most important issue in this respect had been the cash flow which was reported as the 10-Q filing type with the Security Exchange Commission. Prospective Analysis From the financial analysis, it can be analysed that the inconsistency of the financial records of Enron after 1996 provided a clear indication of probable bankruptcy of the company. The credit worthiness has also been discussed through the debt-equity ratio. At the stand point of the financial year 2000, though it was difficult for the investors to analyse the actual condition of the company as all the statements consisted with the accounting errors, still after analysing the annual reports of five years and the financial statements, it can be concluded that proper analysis of the balance sheet and cash flow statement definitely provided hints for the future possibilities of the company. Conclusion In order to analyse the financial statements, it is required to thoroughly evaluate the annual report of the company. Consequently, it indicates certain unpleasant issues of the company. From the very beginning, there was an issue related to the SPEs whether the accounts should be included or not. Apart from that it had also been noticed that the company not only manipulates the accounting and financial data but also they are involved in share price rigging issues also. Enron had tried to keep their security analysts and other governmental authorities in their good books through hiding the actual working condition of the company and also got involved with the manipulation to show off a good image of the company as it can attract more investors. From all the previous discussions it can be depicted without hesitation that Enron not only cheated their external stakeholders but also their internal stakeholders, notably the employees through the pension schemes. According to the perception of the concerned quarters, the most important issue which can be consider as the core issue of this scam is the ‘snow ball’ policy. It had been already discussed that Enron had recorded the costs of the concealed projects. Therefore, it can be concluded that Enron scam is not only the instance of the bankruptcy and the auditing failure but also can be considered as the biggest example of the unethical practices and the corporate mis - governance of a reputed organisation and untailored rules and regulation of government and accounting control boards. This paper can be concluded on this note that all the companies which are trying to involve with such manipulation should keep in mind along with the government authorities, the affect of the Enron scam and must keep themselves away from those practices and bring in strong and advanced regulations within the process accordingly. References Benston, G. J. & Hartgraves, A. L., No Date. The Accounting Issues. Enron: What Happened and What We Can Learn From It. [Online] Available at: http://bbs.cenet.org.cn/uploadimages/200311294124115529.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Clayton, R. J., 2002. Enron’s Financial Position. Enron: Market Exploitation and Correction. [Online] Available at: http://financialdecisionsonline.org/current/clayton.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. David Eccles School of Business, 2005. Good Financial Statement Analysis Consists of Four Key Steps. Financial Statement Analysis. [Online] Available at: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:JREQ1j1pBmcJ:home.business.utah.edu/actcb/6010mkt.doc+enron%27s+financial+statements+analysis&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Healy, P. M. & Et. Al, 2003. The Fall of Enron. Journal of Economic Perspectives. [Online] Available at: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~kathrynd/JEP.FallofEnron.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Jickling, M., No Date. Banking Issues. The Enron Collapse: An Overview of Financial Issues. [Online] Available at: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/9267.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. National Council for Science and the Environment, 2000. CRS Reports. Derivatives Regulation: Legislation in the 106th Congress. [Online] Available at: http://www.environmentors.org/NLE/CRS/abstract.cfm?NLEid=1359 [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Purcell, P. J. & Et. Al., 2002. Summary. The Enron Bankruptcy and Employer Stock in Retirement Plans. [Online] Available at: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/9102.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Shorter, G., 2002. Introduction. Auditing and Accounting Regulation: Key SEC Powers. [Online] Available at: http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/3623.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Valustox, 2003. End-Run Enron. Newsletter. [Online] Available at: http://www.valustox.com/Newsletters/enron.htm [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Bibliography Benston, G, J, 2003. The Quality of Corporate Financial Statements and Their Auditors before and after Enron. Policy Analysis. [Online] Available at: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa497.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Committee of Concerned Shareholders, No Date. Historical Analysis, Financial Statement Analysis. [Online] Available at: http://www.concernedshareholders.com/CCS_FSA.html#Historical%20Analysis%20v2.3 [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Enron, 1998. Financial Highlights. Enron Annual Report. [Online] Available at: http://picker.uchicago.edu/Enron/EnronAnnualReport1998.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Enron, 1999. Financial Highlights. Enron Annual Report. [Online] Available at: http://picker.uchicago.edu/Enron/EnronAnnualReport1999.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Enron, 2000. Financial Highlights. Enron Annual Report. [Online] Available at: http://picker.uchicago.edu/Enron/EnronAnnualReport2000.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Ronen, J., No Date. Introduction. Post-Enron Reform: Financial Statement, Insurance, and GAAP Re-visited. [Online] Available at: http://w4.stern.nyu.edu/emplibrary/Ronen.Joshua.pdf [Accessed July 01, 2010]. Read More